CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd.

325 ITR 148High Court2010#638 most cited

What is CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. authority for?

Discounts offered to distributors under a tightly controlled relationship constitute commission and are subject to tax deduction at source under Section 194H of the Income-tax Act.

155

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. · Idea Cellular · 325 ITR 148 · Section 194H · discounts to distributors · commission · tax deduction at source · TDS on commission · assessee in default · Section 40(a)(ia)

Also reported as

76 Taxmann.com 77189 Taxmann 118

Sections most often in play

Section 194HSection 40(a)(ia)Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 35ABBSection 271(1)(c)Section 35ABASection 263

Issues it is cited on

section 35abbsection 194hresulting companysection 201(1a)interest under section 201(1a)section 201(1)assessee in defaultsection 194demergersection 194jenduring benefitsection 35

Judgments citing CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd.

Tata Sky Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 3215/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3214/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3215/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of Unit 301, To 305, 3 Rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [Now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner Of Income – Mumbai-400 098 Tax, Range 16(1)] Mumbai .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aagcs9294M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3971/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3972/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Sky Ltd. Income Tax 7(3) 34D Floor, C-1, Wadia 6Th Room No. 615, Floor, International Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Bombay Dyeing), Mumbai-400 020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbi-400 025 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Senior Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29-07-2020 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-09-2020

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy
Section 143(3)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री जी. मिंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3214/Mum/2014 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3215/Mum/2014 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner of Unit 301, to 305, 3 rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner of Income – Mumbai-400 098 tax, Range 16…

Tata Sky Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 3214/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3214/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3215/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of Unit 301, To 305, 3 Rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [Now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner Of Income – Mumbai-400 098 Tax, Range 16(1)] Mumbai .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aagcs9294M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3971/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3972/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Sky Ltd. Income Tax 7(3) 34D Floor, C-1, Wadia 6Th Room No. 615, Floor, International Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Bombay Dyeing), Mumbai-400 020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbi-400 025 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Senior Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29-07-2020 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-09-2020

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy
Section 143(3)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री जी. मिंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3214/Mum/2014 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3215/Mum/2014 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner of Unit 301, to 305, 3 rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner of Income – Mumbai-400 098 tax, Range 16…

Aditya Mohapatra, Dhenkanal vs. Principal CIT-2, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/CTK/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.155/Ctk/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Sri Aditya Mohapatra, Vs. Pr.Cit-2, Bhubaneswar Prop.: Orissa Motors, Kujakanta, Main Road, Dhenkanal. Pan No. : Aaacl 6593 N (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Damodar Pati, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam,Cit Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/09/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Revisionary Order Passed U/S.263 Of The Act By The Pr.Cit-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 21.03.2016 For The A.Y.2012-2013. 2. Earlier This Appeal Was Disposed Off By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 29.08.2017. Thereafter The Assessee Challenged The Order Of The Tribunal Before The Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court & The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Order Dated 21.03.2018 Passed In W.P.(C)No.22608 Of 2017 Set Aside The Order Of The Tribunal To Pass Fresh Order Directing The Assessee To File The Documents As He Wants. Accordingly, The Appeal Of The Assessee Restored To Its Original Number & Finally Heard With The Consent Of Both The Parties.

For Appellant: Shri Damodar Pati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam,CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 194HSection 263Section 40

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.155/CTK/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Sri Aditya Mohapatra, Vs. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar Prop.: Orissa Motors, Kujakanta, Main Road, Dhenkanal. PAN No. : AAACL 6593 N (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Damodar Pati, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam,CIT DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 26/08/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/09/2020 आदेश / O R…

Vodafone Idea Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, TDS, Bhubaneswar

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 306/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms Soumya Singh & Nirod PatadeFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 194HSection 194JSection 201(1)Section 201(3)

…of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Bharati Airtel Ltd (supra), wherein, it was held as under: “ 28. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Idea Cellular Limited reported in (2010) 325 ITR 148, while dealing with the commission / brokerage to the distributor on the sim cards / recharge coupons under Section 194 H of the Act, it was held as under: “51. It is obvious that a service can only be rendered and cannot be sold. The owner of the SIM Cards and recharge coupons is the assessee-company, M/s. Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. This is b…

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.9 ( Formerly Known As Vodafone South Ltd Now Merged With Vodafone Mobile Services Limited), Chennai vs. ITO (TDS) Ward 1(6), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1535/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1348 & 1349/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Vodafone South Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. (Now Known As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Tds Circle – 3, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabcb5847L] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), [Formerly Known As Vodafone Ward I(6), South Ltd.] Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, : Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.05.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvurul Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 02.02.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10. Since Common Ground Has Been Raised By The Same Assessee, Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Respondent: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 194HSection 200Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 201(3)(i)Section 203

…had correctly created demand under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) was not justified at all to delete such demands. 3.7 Similarly, by referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. in 325 ITR 148 as well as various other decisions, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court has held that the distributors acted on behalf of the assessee for procuring and retaining customers and, therefore, the discount given was commis…

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.9 ( Formerly Known As Vodafone South Ltd Now Merged With Vodafone Mobile Services Limited), Chennai vs. ITO (TDS) Ward 1(6), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1534/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1348 & 1349/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Vodafone South Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. (Now Known As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Tds Circle – 3, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabcb5847L] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), [Formerly Known As Vodafone Ward I(6), South Ltd.] Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, : Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.05.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvurul Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 02.02.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10. Since Common Ground Has Been Raised By The Same Assessee, Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Respondent: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 194HSection 200Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 201(3)(i)Section 203

…had correctly created demand under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) was not justified at all to delete such demands. 3.7 Similarly, by referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. in 325 ITR 148 as well as various other decisions, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court has held that the distributors acted on behalf of the assessee for procuring and retaining customers and, therefore, the discount given was commis…

ACIT TDS Circle 3, Chennai vs. Vodafone South Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1349/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1348 & 1349/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Vodafone South Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. (Now Known As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Tds Circle – 3, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabcb5847L] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), [Formerly Known As Vodafone Ward I(6), South Ltd.] Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, : Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.05.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvurul Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 02.02.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10. Since Common Ground Has Been Raised By The Same Assessee, Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Respondent: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 194HSection 200Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 201(3)(i)Section 203

…had correctly created demand under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) was not justified at all to delete such demands. 3.7 Similarly, by referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. in 325 ITR 148 as well as various other decisions, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court has held that the distributors acted on behalf of the assessee for procuring and retaining customers and, therefore, the discount given was commis…

ACIT TDS Circle 3, Chennai vs. Vodafone South Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1348/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1348 & 1349/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Vodafone South Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. (Now Known As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Tds Circle – 3, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. [Pan: Aabcb5847L] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S. Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer (Tds), [Formerly Known As Vodafone Ward I(6), South Ltd.] Tower-I, 9Th Floor, Chennai. Tvh Beliciaa Towers, Block 94, Nrc Nagar, Chennai 600 028. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, : Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocate & Shri Ketan Ved, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.05.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvurul Rl Reddy: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 02.02.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10. Since Common Ground Has Been Raised By The Same Assessee, Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Respondent: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 194HSection 200Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 201(3)(i)Section 203

…had correctly created demand under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) was not justified at all to delete such demands. 3.7 Similarly, by referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. in 325 ITR 148 as well as various other decisions, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT in 332 ITR 255, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court has held that the distributors acted on behalf of the assessee for procuring and retaining customers and, therefore, the discount given was commis…

DCIT 8 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (Mah.) Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2012-2013

ITA 1059/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Hiten Chande (AR)For Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy (CIT)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 40

…ppellant had not deducted any tax at source, the AO disallowed the amount of Rs. 57, 24,22, 93Q/- relying on following decisions: - 1 The judgment of Honourable Delhi High Court in the case of CIT XVII Vs Idea Cellular Ltd [2010] 189 Taxman 118 (Dclhi)/[2010] 325 ITR 148 (Delhi/[2010] 230 CTR 43 (Delhi) 2 The judgment of Honourable Kerala. High Court in the case of Vodafonc Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs ACIT [2010] 194 Taxman 518 (Kerala)/ {2011] 332 JTR 255{Kerala)/(2QlQl 235 CTR 393 3 The decision of Honurable ITAT Chennai in the case of 1TO, TDS Vs Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd [2011] 12 taxmann.com 45 (Chennai)/[2011]…

Shri Vishal Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6324/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.6323 & 6324/Del/2016 िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Years. 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…ous judicial decisions terming the above expenses as not being commission paid by the appellant and thus not covered by the provisions of section 194H of the Act.” 4. In applying the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Idea Cellular Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 148 when the facts of the appellant’s are different and distinguishable. 5. In ignoring our submissions and confirmation from M/s Reliance Communication Ltd. that the payments made to the retailers by the appellant are determined/instructed by the principal company and paid on its behalf which means that the appellant has not paid any payment to the…

Shri Vishal Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6323/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.6323 & 6324/Del/2016 िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Years. 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40

…ous judicial decisions terming the above expenses as not being commission paid by the appellant and thus not covered by the provisions of section 194H of the Act.” 4. In applying the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Idea Cellular Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 148 when the facts of the appellant’s are different and distinguishable. 5. In ignoring our submissions and confirmation from M/s Reliance Communication Ltd. that the payments made to the retailers by the appellant are determined/instructed by the principal company and paid on its behalf which means that the appellant has not paid any payment to the…

Idea Cellular Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS) 1(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3785/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No. 3785/Mum/2016 For (Assessment Year 2012-13) M/S. Vodafone Idea Ltd. Ito (Tds)-1(2)(4), (Formerly Known As Idea 803, K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Cellular Ltd.), Skyline Icon, Vs. Hospital Building, 1St Floor, 86/92 Andheri Kurla Charni Road (W), Road, Marol Naka, Andheri Mumbai-400002. (E), Mumbai-400059. Pan: Aaacb2100P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi with Shri C.D. Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja CIT-DR with Shri V.K. Agarwal ( Sr DR)
Section 133ASection 191Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)Section 254(1)

…6/JP/2010 order dt June 12, 2015,  ACIT vs Bharti Hexacom Ltd in ITAs No.830 to 833/JP/15, order dt April 18,2016 6 ITA No. 3785 Mum 2016-M/s. Vodafone Idea Ltd. 8. The ld.AR in all fairness submitted that the Delhi High Court in CIT vs Idea Cellular Ltd 325 ITR 148 (Del), Kerala High Court in Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd vs ACIT 232 ITR 255(Ker) and Calcutta High Court in Bharti Cellular Ltd vs ACIT decided the issue against the assessee. The Ld.AR submits that there is no decision of jurisdictional High Court on the similar issue. It was further submitted that Karnataka and Rajasthan High Courts, after cons…

The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd, Bellary vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax TDS Circle, Hubli-Dharwad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2886/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.N Siddappapji, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 12ASection 133ASection 194ASection 197ASection 201Section 201(1)

…stent and uniformly applied while interpreting clause (i) of the Explanation to Section 194H of the Act. Appropriate in this regard would be to refer to the decision of the High Court of Delhi in Commissioner of Income Tax versus Idea Cellular Limited, (2010) 325 ITR 148 (Delhi) wherein Explanation clause (i) to Section 194H of the Act had come up for consideration and on interpretation it was held that it would apply only if payment was received or receivable directly or indirectly by a person acting on behalf of another person for (i) services rendered (not being professional) and (ii) for any services in the c…

Tata Moters Limited (Formerly Known As Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, Cir..-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3333/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Tata Motors Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Tata Income Tax-2(1), Engineering & Locomotive Aayakar Bhavan Company Limited M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 Bombay House, 24 020 Homi Mody Street Hutatma Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaact2727Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Tata Motors Limited Income Tax-2(1), (Formerly Known As Tata Aayakar Bhavan Engineering & Locomotive M.K. Marg, Mumbai – Company Limited 400 020 Bombay House, 24 Homi Mody Street Hutatma Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaact2727Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM M/s. Tata Motors Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner of (Formerly known as Tata Income Tax-2(1), Engineering & Locomotive Aayakar Bhavan Company Limited M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 Bombay House, 24 020 Homi Mody Street Hutatma Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No.AAACT2727Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Tata Motors Limited Income Tax-2(1), (Formerly known as Tata Aayakar Bhavan Engineering & Locomotive M.K. Marg, Mumbai – Company Limited 400 020 Bombay House, 24 Homi Mody Street Hutatma Chow…

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Futura Value Retail Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 6705/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Acit-9(3)(2), M/S. Future Value 418, 4Th Floor, Retail Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Knowledge House, V. Mumbai-400020 Shyam Nagar, Off Jogeshwari Vikhroli Link Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai-400060 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaecp3041P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri. Sushil Kumar Poddar (Dr) Assessee By: Ms. Dinkle Hariya सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 6705/Mum/2016, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 23.08.2016, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16,Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”) In Ita No. Cit(A)/ I.T.305/Dcit-9(3)(2)/2015-16, For Assessment Year 2012-13, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 29.03.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2012-13. I.T.A. No.6705/Mum/2016

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariyaFor Respondent: Shri. Sushil Kumar Poddar (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194HSection 194JSection 40

…s interpretation has been consistent and uniformly applied while interpreting clause (i) of the Explanation to Section 194H of the Act. Appropriate in this regard would be to refer to the decision of the High Court of Delhi in CIT v. Idea Cellular Ltd. [2010] 325 ITR 148/189 Taxman 118 wherein Explanation clause (i) to Section 194H of the Act had come up for consideration and on interpretation it was held that it would apply only if payment was received or receivable directly or indirectly by a person acting on behalf of another person for (i) services rendered (not being professional) and (ii) for any services i…

Gm Cmts Cellular Dn, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT(TDS), Ahmedabad

ITA 2541/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2541/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Gm Cmts Cellular, Dn, बनाम/ Dcit(Tds) Ahmedabad. Bsnl Vs. 3Rd Floor, T. E. Building, Hc Mathur Lane, Bimanagar, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aab Cb5 576 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shaleen Patni, A.R
Section 194HSection 201Section 201(1)

…the relationship between the assessee and the distributors was on principal to principal basis was incorrect and in fact there was a principal to agent relationship as had been held by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in CIT vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. reported in 325 ITR 148 and the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 332 ITR 255. It was contended by the Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative that the demand had rightly created by the AO in this case. 5.0 We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the relevant material on record. We find that th…

Entertainment Network (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 852/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.852/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Entertainment Network Acit 16(1), Room No. 439, 4T H Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (India) Ltd., M.K Road, 4T H Floor, A Wing, V. Mumbai- 400020 Matulya Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaace7796G आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.812/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Acit 16(1), Room No. 439, Entertainment Network 4T H Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (India) Ltd., M.K Road, Mumbai 400020 4T H Floor, A Wing, V. Matulya Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel(West), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaace7796G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Respondent: Shri. R. Manjunatha Swamy &
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…iscount has been reduced from the value of price charged by the assessee from the advertising agency on sale of airtime. 2.6 The AO had relied on the the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. M/s.Idea Cellular Ltd. reported in 325 ITR 148 which has also discussed the definition of commission as well as discount and also the difference between two terms/expression. There is no dispute that there is no necessity for a formal contract of agency it may be implied which could arise from the act and conduct of the parties or situation in which the parties are put as observed by the Hon'…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 812/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.852/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Entertainment Network Acit 16(1), Room No. 439, 4T H Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (India) Ltd., M.K Road, 4T H Floor, A Wing, V. Mumbai- 400020 Matulya Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan :Aaace7796G आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.812/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Acit 16(1), Room No. 439, Entertainment Network 4T H Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (India) Ltd., M.K Road, Mumbai 400020 4T H Floor, A Wing, V. Matulya Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel(West), Mumbai-400013 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaace7796G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Respondent: Shri. R. Manjunatha Swamy &
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…iscount has been reduced from the value of price charged by the assessee from the advertising agency on sale of airtime. 2.6 The AO had relied on the the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. M/s.Idea Cellular Ltd. reported in 325 ITR 148 which has also discussed the definition of commission as well as discount and also the difference between two terms/expression. There is no dispute that there is no necessity for a formal contract of agency it may be implied which could arise from the act and conduct of the parties or situation in which the parties are put as observed by the Hon'…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals are allowed and the judgment of the Tribunal on this aspect is set aside

ITA 5083/DEL/2013[2010-11 (F.Y.- 2009-10)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2019

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charydcit, Vs. Sistema Shyam Teleservices Circle-5(1), Ltd, New Delhi A-60, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi Pan: Aaccs1709H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Alok Vasant, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 194HSection 201

…e appeal of the assessee was allowed and therefore revenue is in appeal before us. 4. The learned departmental representative submitted that this appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs IDEA CELLULAR LTD 325 ITR 148 which is a jurisdictional High Court and further covered by the coordinate bench in case of Jay shree enterprises vs Department of income tax in ITA number 4479/2011 and 4171/2011. Therefore it was submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. The learned departmental representative further submitted that it has been hel…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Idea Cellular Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2207/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Ronak G. Doshi, CA
Section 201(1)

…onsidered the same judgement of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) and has also considered the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. as reported in (2010) 325 ITR 148 (Delhi). He further pointed out that it is noted by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered the judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Director, Prasar Bharti as reported in (2010) 325 ITR 205 (Kerala) and also another judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court rendered in the case of V…